New Research Shows Age, Education, and Income Create Wider Divides Than Geography
May 14, 2025, New York, NY – DOAR, the nation’s leading trial consulting company, today released findings from its comprehensive study examining public attitudes related to high-tech patent litigation across four major IP venues. The survey revealed significant demographic differences in how potential jurors view Big Tech companies, foreign corporations, and patent validity, with implications for litigation strategy in intellectual property disputes.
The report, “Juror Attitudes Toward High-Tech Companies in Patent Litigation,” was conducted by the DOAR Research Center and surveyed 1,631 respondents across four major IP venues: the Marshall Division of the Eastern District of Texas, the Waco Division of the Western District of Texas, the Central District of California, and the District of Delaware.
“The landscape of IP litigation continues to evolve, with recent changes in venue assignments and judicial appointments reshaping the strategic calculations for patent cases,” said Dr. Chad Lackey, Director at DOAR and author of the study. “Our research challenges traditional assumptions about venue selection, revealing that demographic factors like age and income often carry more weight than geographic location.”
Key findings from the study include:
- Surprising Support for Big Tech: Nearly three-quarters (73%) of all respondents had positive opinions of large technology companies, though attitudes varied significantly by company, with Meta viewed most negatively.
- Foreign Companies Face Challenges: 71% of respondents believe foreign companies doing business in the U.S. are more likely than U.S. companies to disregard U.S. law, with older respondents expressing the strongest bias.
- Demographics Outweigh Geography: Age, education, income, and political affiliation had a greater impact on tech-related attitudes than venue, highlighting the importance of jury composition in IP litigation.
- Education and Income Drive Patent Skepticism: In the Marshall Division, a majority of higher-educated (59%) and higher-income (54%) respondents believed patent examiners were “very likely” to make serious mistakes when evaluating patents, making these specific demographics particularly receptive to validity challenges.
- Generational Divide on Patent Trolls: Public opinion on non-practicing entities (NPEs) was evenly split across venues, with a clear generational divide – nearly 60% of respondents under 45 viewed NPEs as champions of small innovators, while 59-66% of those over 55 viewed them as opportunistic “leeches” filing frivolous lawsuits.
- Industry Experts Preferred: Most respondents across all venues (73-79%) preferred learning about advanced technology from industry executives rather than academic experts.
“The implications of our research extend beyond venue selection to the heart of effective trial preparation and jury selection,” said Dr. Lackey. “While regional differences exist, they are often overshadowed by the more profound impact of demographic characteristics. Understanding these dynamics is critical not just for jury selection but for crafting persuasive arguments that resonate with the specific composition of your jury pool.”
Download the full report of our findings, including a detailed analysis of demographic factors and specific recommendations for trial strategy.
About DOAR
DOAR is the nation’s leading trial consulting company, providing critical insight and strategic advice to lawyers at top-tier law firms and major corporations involved in high-stakes, complex legal disputes.
For more information about DOAR, visit DOAR.com and follow us at @DOARlitigation.
Media Inquiries:
Cindy Siegel
Vice President of Marketing
media@DOAR.com
